Sections 67 and 122 (5A) (9) of the Income Tax Rules, 2002, 13, 231 (1) (6) and 131 deductions were modified on the basis of reasonable amendments after appeal to the tribunal costs. And consider and calculate the size of its activities, which, in the present amount, the relevant tax officer failed to identify any expenditures which were either related to profitable income or exempt capital gains from the tax officer. is about. The expenses were distributed only on the basis of the assumption that the taxpayer did not invest in the shares, then the funds available to him were invested in the business, which would indicate that the taxation officer had to prove his evidence. Cannot present any evidence for. The action alleges that only on the imagination the taxation officer failed to prove the nature and size of the activity, which amounted to a requirement as required by the provisions of section 67 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, the taxation officer It was stated by the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) that it was rightly deleted, no interference was required by the tax officer. (B) Income Tax Rules, 2002, which may exempt export exemption from the gross profit, which is a waiver of the provisions of section 154 (4) of the Commissioner Income Tax Ordinance 2001. On the issue of division of appeals (appeals) filed by the department against the Commissioner Income Tax decision, the order passed by the Commissioner Income Tax (appeal) was confirmed.
Related judgments — Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan, 2010
